Auditors’ Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether material noncompliance with the compliance requirements referred to above occurred, whether due to fraud or error, and express an opinion on the County’s compliance based on our audit. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards, the Uniform Guidance and Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General, will always detect material noncompliance when it exists. The risk of not detecting material noncompliance resulting from fraud is higher than for that resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control. Noncompliance with the compliance requirements referred to above is considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, it would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user of the report on compliance about the County’s compliance with the requirements of each major federal program and state project as a whole. In performing an audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards, the Uniform Guidance and Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General, we: • Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. • Identify and assess the risks of material noncompliance, whether due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the County’s compliance with the compliance requirements referred to above and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. • Obtain an understanding of the County’s internal control over compliance relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with the Uniform Guidance and Chapter 10.550, Rules of the Auditor General, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the County’s internal control over compliance. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed. We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and any significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in internal control over compliance that we identified during the audit. Report on Internal Control over Compliance A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program or state project on a timely basis. A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program or state project will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program or state project that is less severe than a material weakness in internal control over compliance, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. 387
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzM3Mjg=